J&B Hopkins Ltd v A&v Building Solution Ltd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Eyre |
| Judgment Date | 12 April 2022 |
| Neutral Citation | [2022] EWHC 1186 (TCC) |
| Docket Number | Case No: HT-2021-000464 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Technology and Construction Court) |
[2022] EWHC 1186 (TCC)
Mr Justice Eyre
Case No: HT-2021-000464
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALES
TECHNOLOGY & CONSTRUCTION COURT (QBD)
The Rolls Building
7 Rolls Buildings, Fetter Lane
London EC4A 1NL
James Frampton (instructed by Hawkswell Klivington Solicitors) for the Claimant
Charles Edwards (instructed by way of Direct Access) for the Defendant
JUDGMENT ON APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTION, APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT AND APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT
(Approved Transcript)
I have to address the principles in Denton v TH White Limited [2014] EWCA Civ 906. Serious though the breach is, because statements have to be in on time, I accept that there is an explanation given (again, not the most potent of explanations), but in the circumstances of the case as a whole it is appropriate to grant relief, and I do.
(After further submissions)
There is a dispute between the parties as to the validity of an application for payment and of a payment notice. Those are said to have been served by the Defendant and the Claimant respectively in March and April of last year.
On 2 nd December of last year the Claimant issued Part 8 proceedings seeking the court's determination as to the validity of the payment application 14 and of payment notice 14.
On 16 th December 2021 an acknowledgement of service was served saying that the Part 8 claim related to an ongoing adjudication; that it did not fully represent the Defendant's position on the facts; and that the personal service of documents was registered with the court on 2 nd December. The rest of the acknowledgement of service makes reference to the adjudication and says a substantial dispute of fact is involved. However, it does not identify the factual matters relating to the issues in the Part 8 claim which are said to be in issue.
On 22 March 2022 O'Farrell J gave directions in this matter providing for today's hearing. In the recital to her order O'Farrell J noted that there had been an acknowledgement of service without the service of evidence and that the Defendant intended to object to the Part 8 process as being premature. The order provided at paragraph 2 that:
“The parties shall co-operate in ensuring all documents necessary for the court to determine the Part 8 claim and/or the Defendant's objections are made available in electronic form in good time before the hearing.”
That, as I repeat, was on 22 nd March. Mr Paduraru's first witness statement was dated 4 th April. In that he sets out matters of history;...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
A & v Building Solutions Ltd v J & B Hopkins Ltd
...THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BUSINESS ANS PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALES TECHNOLOGY AND CONSTRUCTION COURT (KBD) Mr Justice Eyre [2022] EWHC 1186 (TCC) Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Charles Edwards (instructed by Direct Access) for the James Frampton (instructed by Haw......